A durapolist, a term coined by a Yale student Barack Orbach, refers to a company who controls a large share of a market in non perishable goods. Durapolists have a unique problem; disregarding increases in human population (which is another sustainability problem in itself), the durapolist, once they have supplied everybody in a target market with a specific product, will put themselves out of business. The most common way to combat this is by engineering planned obsolescence into their products, there by securing their future by ensuring that there will always be a market; the consumers whose products have broken and need replacement.
Planned obsolescence was developed during the 1930’s. It started when an engineer for GE, when debating a new lamp they were making, decided that instead of having it last for 3 battery cycles, it would last for one at increased brightness. Not only would this mean a higher quality product during the time that it worked, but it meant that consumers would have to replace them sooner, increasing sales. The idea soon spread throughout the company, and soon other companies and industries were picking up on the idea. During a meeting with the Society of Automotive Engineers a few years later, talks proposing a shortening of the lifetime of cars took place, to great effect. This trend increased, and by the time the 50’s rolled around planned obsolescence was common place (Beder). Although there were talks on the ethics of designing for failure, no change came about, and today planned obsolescence is as common as air.
There are three types of planned obsolescence. Technical obsolescence is when a device breaks down and refuses to work past a certain point. This is common amongst high tech devices, such as cars, computers and cell phones. In most cases, it requires the consumer to replace the item entirely, but in other cases, such as that of automobiles, replacement parts are offered by the company. Thus a revenue stream is kept going, as shoddy parts are replaced. Style obsolescence occurs when an item is perceive to no longer be “cool” or becomes out of date. The third type of planned obsolescence, called notification, is the latest trend. Notification is when the product itself informs the user that it is out of date or worn out, and must be replaced. One example of this is Lenovo’s computer batteries, which warns the user that its limited number of charges the battery can withstand are almost all used, and that replacements are necessary. The computer even directs its owner to the website were another battery, one with the same short lifespan, is available for sale. Another example includes Gillette’s new razors, which have a strip which turns from blue to white warning the user it needs to be replaced, regardless of the actual sharpness of the razor.
Today, planned obsolescence is more common than ever before and takes place in a variety of forms. One current example of planned obsolescence is Apple’s iPod. Although it’s supposed to last three years, a quarter of owners find themselves with an extraordinarily expensive paper weight within just two years, right past the 1 year warranty. After that time, Apple tries to convince those with broken iPods to purchase new ones, instead of attempting to fix them. With a 25% failure rate, most companies would order a recall, but not Apple (Inman). It appears that they knew all along that the iPod would fail, and that this uncompromising attitude was part of the plan.
This conscious engineering of failure leads to many problems. The most prevalent is that of waste. All of the products mentioned above have serious issues with recycling, and can wind up in landfills or contaminating foreign countries. Computers and electronics, for instance, are notoriously hard to recycle. Cars wind up in junk yards, razors wind up in landfills, and the acids from batteries, when disposed of incorrectly, leak into other systems where they’re not supposed to be. With the US alone creating 230 million tons of trash per day (Media) with no end in sight, planned obsolescence becomes an environmental problem as well as a safety hazard for future generations.
The question is, what can we do about it? Is the responsibility up to the consumer, or the producer? Perhaps it’s the Federal Governments job to step in and stop this problem? In the UK, planned obsolescence is deemed illegal by the Sales of Goods Act (Inman). Even with this law, however, iPods, Gillette razors and cars are still sold there. A better solution, which would share the responsibility between all three aforementioned parties, would be for producers of all non-perishable goods to include data on the estimated lifetime of the product. This way, the companies can be held accountable for products which don’t last as long as they are intended to, and consumers can have a say in how planned obsolescence can affect them.
Perhaps one day in the future, we will be able to know exactly how long a product is engineered to last, and make our purchases accordingly. Until then, however, planned obsolescence remains a factor in our everyday life.
Thoughts on Planned Obsolescence
A durapolist, a term coined by a Yale student Barack Orbach, refers to a company who controls a large share of a market in non perishable goods. Durapolists have a unique problem; disregarding increases in human population (which is another sustainability problem in itself), the durapolist, once they have supplied everybody in a target market with a specific product, will put themselves out of business. The most common way to combat this is by engineering planned obsolescence into their products, there by securing their future by ensuring that there will always be a market; the consumers whose products have broken and need replacement.
Planned obsolescence was developed during the 1930’s. It started when an engineer for GE, when debating a new lamp they were making, decided that instead of having it last for 3 battery cycles, it would last for one at increased brightness. Not only would this mean a higher quality product during the time that it worked, but it meant that consumers would have to replace them sooner, increasing sales. The idea soon spread throughout the company, and soon other companies and industries were picking up on the idea. During a meeting with the Society of Automotive Engineers a few years later, talks proposing a shortening of the lifetime of cars took place, to great effect. This trend increased, and by the time the 50’s rolled around planned obsolescence was common place (Beder). Although there were talks on the ethics of designing for failure, no change came about, and today planned obsolescence is as common as air.
There are three types of planned obsolescence. Technical obsolescence is when a device breaks down and refuses to work past a certain point. This is common amongst high tech devices, such as cars, computers and cell phones. In most cases, it requires the consumer to replace the item entirely, but in other cases, such as that of automobiles, replacement parts are offered by the company. Thus a revenue stream is kept going, as shoddy parts are replaced. Style obsolescence occurs when an item is perceive to no longer be “cool” or becomes out of date. The third type of planned obsolescence, called notification, is the latest trend.
Notification is when the product itself informs the user that it is out of date or worn out, and must be replaced. One example of this is Lenovo’s computer batteries, which warns the user that its limited number of charges the battery can withstand are almost all used, and that replacements are necessary. The computer even directs its owner to the website were another battery, one with the same short lifespan, is available for sale. Another example includes Gillette’s new razors, which have a strip which turns from blue to white warning the user it needs to be replaced, regardless of the actual sharpness of the razor.
Today, planned obsolescence is more common than ever before and takes place in a variety of forms. One current example of planned obsolescence is Apple’s iPod. Although it’s supposed to last three years, a quarter of owners find themselves with an extraordinarily expensive paper weight within just two years, right past the 1 year warranty. After that time, Apple tries to convince those with broken iPods to purchase new ones, instead of attempting to fix them. With a 25% failure rate, most companies would order a recall, but not Apple (Inman). It appears that they knew all along that the iPod would fail, and that this uncompromising attitude was part of the plan.
This conscious engineering of failure leads to many problems. The most prevalent is that of waste. All of the products mentioned above have serious issues with recycling, and can wind up in landfills or contaminating foreign countries. Computers and electronics, for instance, are notoriously hard to recycle. Cars wind up in junk yards, razors wind up in landfills, and the acids from batteries, when disposed of incorrectly, leak into other systems where they’re not supposed to be. With the US alone creating 230 million tons of trash per day (Media) with no end in sight, planned obsolescence becomes an environmental problem as well as a safety hazard for future generations.
The question is, what can we do about it? Is the responsibility up to the consumer, or the producer? Perhaps it’s the Federal Governments job to step in and stop this problem? In the UK, planned obsolescence is deemed illegal by the Sales of Goods Act (Inman). Even with this law, however, iPods, Gillette razors and cars are still sold there. A better solution, which would share the responsibility between all three aforementioned parties, would be for producers of all non-perishable goods to include data on the estimated lifetime of the product. This way, the companies can be held accountable for products which don’t last as long as they are intended to, and consumers can have a say in how planned obsolescence can affect them.
Perhaps one day in the future, we will be able to know exactly how long a product is engineered to last, and make our purchases accordingly. Until then, however, planned obsolescence remains a factor in our everyday life.
Works Cited
Beder, Sharon. "Is Planned Obsolescence Socially Responsible?" 11 1998. Engineers Australia. 14 09 2010 <http://www.uow.edu.au/~sharonb/columns/engcol8.html>.Inman, Phillip. 30 09 2006. theguardian.co.uk. 14 09 2010 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/sep/30/news.consumernews>.
Media, Annenberg. learner.com. 2010. 14 9 2010 <http://www.learner.org/interactives/garbage/solidwaste.html>.
Orbach, Barak. "The Duapolist Puzzle: Monopoly Power in Durable Goods Market." 2004. 14 9 2010 <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=496175>.